OSDev.org

ru2aqare wrote:On another note. I see lots of "weird" acronyms popping up for the good old x86 architecture. x86_32 is a good example, but there was even x32... I was stunned to see that.

Yeah, but x86 probably has the most confusing legacy of any architecture. It would make sense that the 64-bit version of the IA32 architecture would be IA64, but Intel had to go and make the failure known as the Itanium and use that name. The 64-bit variant was also created by AMD, not Intel. Add on the fact that i386 was originally an extension of a 16-bit architecture, and you have a very convoluted system indeed.

ru2aqare wrote:

JohnnyTheDon wrote:The problem is that you have to pay for the 64-bit edition when you have already paid for the 32-bit edition.

Oops. I forgot that. Power to all the MSDNAA users...

Power to all the users who are denying Microsoft their "OS tax".

(And before you send the FBI to get me for software pirating, I'm a Linux user. Not because it's better, or because of its philosophy, but because it's free as in beer. )

Solar wrote:(And before you send the FBI to get me for software pirating, I'm a Linux user. Not because it's better, or because of its philosophy, but because it's free as in beer. )

(Technically pirating a copy of Winslowz is free as in beer cause you may not get your free speech but you don't have to shell out half your paycheck for it!)

ru2aqare wrote:x32

What the hell?

earlz wrote:I also remember a day way back when in the autodelete forum(or was it testing forum back then) someone proved that if you had over like 50 embedded quotes it completely messed up the entire page(as far as layout of HTML anyway).. heck that might have even been back in Mega Tokyo days though..

Well I've never seen more than three embedded quotes so it was probably the MT days.

never heard of x32..

When I'm afraid of looking dumb in a possibly ambiguous situation, I use x86-32 and x86-64.. I think I've even used x86-16 before..

Yea.. intel really screwed us over by saying x64 and IA64 is italium.. ugh dumb

earlz wrote:never heard of x32..

Take a look at http://imk.cx/pc/x264/. This is where I get my x264 builds from. Get the archive and extract it, a voliá, you get an x64 (which is okay) and an x32 subdirectory...

earlz wrote:Yea.. intel really screwed us over by saying x64 and IA64 is italium.. ugh dumb

But Itanium was introduced way before x64, so Intel was right in thinking that IA64 should refer to Itanium, which they hoped would take over the world someday. Sadly it didnt happen.

The Atom silicon all has 64-bit support inside it; I have in my posession a dual core 64-bit atom. The only difference is that Intel bonded two dies into package and didn't neuter it's 64-bit support. It hums away happily running OpenSolaris and playing video with nVIDIA's VDPAU.

Unfortunatey ship most of them with 64-bit support disabled...

I also have an atom board (nVidia ION based) which has a dual core N330 which according to Intel is 64-bit (Source: http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=35641)

Yes, the Atom 330's are 64-bit (and dual core), too bad it's not in any of those small netbooks etc.

I was looking at maybe getting on one of these at some point: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6813500030

For a list of what the different Atom processors support: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_In ... processors

--

<ThreadBranch Title="Video Cards (Performance, HW Documentation, NVidia, Intel)" By="Brendan">
http://forum.osdev.org/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=20948
</ThreadBranch>